Things To Know

Thursday, September 23, 2010

Re: Leaders and Homosexuality

So you've probably noticed this too: all these anti-gay politicans and evangelical pastors/leaders go on and on about the evils of homosexuality, passing laws and other bullshit only to THEN get caught banging another dude. Even, at times, young men (perhaps this is where the gay = pedophile thing comes from?)

I briefly skimmed the recent Evergreen talk (caution: talk will piss you off) where Bishop whatshisname said that we shouldn't use the terms "gay" "lesbian" or "homosexual" because "god doesn't think of [us] that way."

I'm going to leave the WTF silent and just assumed, here.

Anyway, you know that in the past the leaders "exhorted" their gay sheep to marry straight and all would be well. Not to mention the former subjection to electroshock therapy where--and I don't fucking GET this--showed the men gay pornography (i guess porn is only acceptable in this situation?) and then shocked the hell out of them as to teach them a righteous reaction to gay sex.

But now it's a matter of "just don't act gay." "it's not sin unless you fuck someone of your own gender"

(but in the dark corners they still say it's a matter of overcoming it)

So. With all of that in mind:

How many of the LDS leaders--I'm talking top leaders, here--do you think are closeted gay men? Who were? ARE?

I think there're probably a few, actually. Given what we've seen, they might be the most outspoken ones.

Spencer W. Kimball, perhaps? He of "if you rub one out you'll totally end up in a circle jerk with all your buddies and then have a big gay orgy" mentality?

9 comments:

I could not get through that talk. I tried, but is so full of the same old rhetoric. I don't know about told leaders, but I would be surprised if there was not at least a few. While not a church leader I would say famous Mormon - I totally think Orson Scott Card is gay and I think it is why he is so damn vocal. That is someone I would love to see on one of the podcasts but chances of him actually talking are slim to none.

"electroshock therapy" is actually completely different from what LGBTQ people were subjected to by the mormon un-gay-ifiers. What those people went through can only be classified as torture. Actual "electroshock therapy" involves sedation, pain-killers, etc - all to reduce the pain and trauma of the therapy (not that it's been shown to be all that effective as therapy for mental illness, but it is entirely different from what Evergreen does). It's the opposite of the goal of electroshock torture, which intends fear and pain so that the victim will associate fear and pain with what naturally arouses them.

I know one gay former member of the Seventies (do they even still have them, been 20 years since I left). He was excommunicated after many years as a fairly high ranking member of the Church. I saw a lot of abuse of authority when I was a member. I would not be surprised at all if a good portion of the leadership were sex offenders of one sort or another.

I second the vote on Spencer W. He was just too damned obsessed with sexual topics and the evils of gay sex.

I pleaded with a judge once to not send my drug-addicted client to prison simply for being a drug addict. He was known as a hanging judge and was particularly harsh on drug offenders. The next day the judge was arrested for possession of cocaine and a few other illegal substances. He was probably high when I was arguing against prison.

So those church leaders who are always harping about "sexual purity" and chastity ad nauseam ... All those people who are really obsessed and "disgusted" with the sexual "perversions" of other people ... Yeah. Three guesses how they spend most of their leisure time.

@Lisa: Mostly I meant the "duh" _because_ the GAs mostly give talks about things that affect them or the local Utah church. If they harp on homosexuality, it means that they've suddenly noticed a lot of gay people around Utah, or they have tendencies inside themselves that disturb them.

IMHO, of course.

I think that's one reason why there's such a insistence over keeping gays out of the military. These "man's men" tend to be "manly" because that's not what a "sissy" gay would do. If gays can be rough-and-tough marines, suddenly the world for the repressed gay isn't black-and-white, and awful questions arise inside themselves. Also, IMHO.